Database Info

Nenamark 2, Sensation is faster than G2X

http://nena.se/nenamark/view?version=2
http://www.gsmarena.com/htc_sensation-review-605p4.php

nraudigy2 said:
http://nena.se/nenamark/view?version=2
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
who cares? SGSII stills faster... and G2X it's just 5FPS under...

tomeu0000 said:
who cares? SGSII stills faster... and G2X it's just 5FPS under...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Talk about troll

tomeu0000 said:
who cares? SGSII stills faster... and G2X it's just 5FPS under...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Who cares? All of our phones will be obsolete by the end of the year anyways
Sent from my HTC Sensation 4G using XDA App

tomeu0000 said:
who cares? SGSII stills faster... and G2X it's just 5FPS under...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
SGS II is faster due to the lower resolution. learn the facts before commenting.

xamadeix said:
SGS II is faster due to the lower resolution. learn the facts before commenting.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Nope, the resolution isnt the finally factor, ( Tegra 2 is powerfull than adreno220 in benchmarks, but Atrix with qHD resolution scores like the sensation, so Adreno220 isnt more powerfull ) just watch CF-Bench, Vellamo bench and other bench, SGSII still superior, in CPU and GPU.
And that % more resolution, will take about 10FPS, max 15 FPS so if at 800x480 Adreno220 stills not more powerfull.
i have a sensation, but for now SGSII is more powerfull.
With optimization maybe, but on default definetly NOT.
Excuse my bad english.

tomeu0000 said:
Nope, the resolution isnt the finally factor, ( Tegra 2 is powerfull than adreno220 in benchmarks, but Atrix with qHD resolution scores like the sensation, so Adreno220 isnt more powerfull ) just watch CF-Bench, Vellamo bench and other bench, SGSII still superior, in CPU and GPU.
And that % more resolution, will take about 10FPS, max 15 FPS so if at 800x480 Adreno220 stills not more powerfull.
i have a sensation, but for now SGSII is more powerfull.
With optimization maybe, but on default definetly NOT.
Excuse my bad english.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Adreno 220 is much better than Ad 205..But sometimes even my dhd is MUCH faster than Sensation..I believe it is the optimization's difference..With the optimization we can have ad 220's best performance..I believe at that time ad 220 will be better than optimized SG2

missing2 said:
Who cares? All of our phones will be obsolete by the end of the year anyways
Sent from my HTC Sensation 4G using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
True, 6 months from now it will be quad core phones, and really, do you care if it takes you 1.275ms longer to type in a phone number on one phone over another?
Seriously guys, get a frikin life, you buy the phone you prefer, everyone's preference is different.... and that's that.
Think of it like this.. A girl will go out with the guy she prefers. Highly unlikely that she will get you to flop it out and make a decision on the millimeter difference here and there.
Moreover, she won't be arguing with other girls on a forum about it either.
.... GET. OVER. IT.
GET. A. LIFE.
Sent from my HTC Sensation Z710a (S-ON GRRRR!) using XDA Premium App

This pretty much sums it up...
http://www.gsmarena.com/htc_sensation-review-605p4.php

artymarty said:
True, 6 months from now it will be quad core phones, and really, do you care if it takes you 1.275ms longer to type in a phone number on one phone over another?
Seriously guys, get a frikin life, you buy the phone you prefer, everyone's preference is different.... and that's that.
Think of it like this.. A girl will go out with the guy she prefers. Highly unlikely that she will get you to flop it out and make a decision on the millimeter difference here and there.
Moreover, she won't be arguing with other girls on a forum about it either.
.... GET. OVER. IT.
GET. A. LIFE.
Sent from my HTC Sensation Z710a (S-ON GRRRR!) using XDA Premium App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Who would want a quadcore phone? @[email protected] I mean, no application in a mobile requires that kind of processor. even a 800mhz processor can process most of the apps now. and besides, who would think of developing an app that would require quadcore? @[email protected]

I'm excited for our phones to be cracked open. I think that is when we will really start to see what they can do. Numbers well dramatically increase.
Can't wait!
Sent from my HTC Sensation 4G using XDA App

vitusdoom said:
Who would want a quadcore phone? @[email protected] I mean, no application in a mobile requires that kind of processor. even a 800mhz processor can process most of the apps now. and besides, who would think of developing an app that would require quadcore? @[email protected]
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Some people would still buy it even if it is overkill. I can't imagine why quad core would be needed in a phone but I think it doesn't stop there.

brusko1972 said:
Some people would still buy it even if it is overkill. I can't imagine why quad core would be needed in a phone but I think it doesn't stop there.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
For gaming purposes I suppose. 30% of all gaming takes place via smartphones so it's a ripe market for developers. Quadcore devices would pretty much put devices on par with console systems.

People would buy a quad core phone (such as I) the same reason why some people get sports car. Are sports car absolutely needed for everyday driving? Most of the time, I would highly doubt it, but it sure is nice as hell to have, no?

twomix9900 said:
People would buy a quad core phone (such as I) the same reason why some people get sports car. Are sports car absolutely needed for everyday driving? Most of the time, I would highly doubt it, but it sure is nice as hell to have, no?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thats not the correct question. lol. you didn't get it.
question is, why would people buy a sports car when in the case he only knows how to drive a bike.
Well, surely, quadcores are great. and mentioned above, games needs it. looking at games today, most of them are not that resource consuming at all. just needs a decent graphic emulator. not processor. you definitely don't understand what a processor does. it only process the loading of a certain app. surely it does process during the game but you can measure the speed clearly during app loading. what does a game that loads up real fast but in the short run, it hangs up like hell? mind you guys, most of the games usually are just 10-25megabytes (most that i've seen) any single core processor can process that fast. should we say, its like 200mb of a game. single cores can process that. but when you say gaming, you should think about graphics first.

From what I have been reading... it will not only be quad core... but also we'll have speeds up to 2.5GHz. That's faster than my laptop

Too bad it loses in pretty much every other benchmark.
GS2 is teh suck, gets crushed in smartbench gaming...
But it's the fastest phone out there....

KingKuba13 said:
Too bad it loses in pretty much every other benchmark.
GS2 is teh suck, gets crushed in smartbench gaming...
But it's the fastest phone out there....
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I don't think most beanchmarks are utilizing these dual core CPU's properly. That goes for all of them. Not just the Sensations. I wouldn't trust any of these benches with dual core CPU's.
Sent from my HTC Sensation 4G using XDA Premium App

KingKuba13 said:
Too bad it loses in pretty much every other benchmark.
GS2 is teh suck, gets crushed in smartbench gaming...
But it's the fastest phone out there....
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Smartbench is weak stuff. Any 3D scene that is too weak will lower the score of GS2. For example it could do 300fps for Neocore benchmark app, but it has a 60fps limit so the app only reports 59fps for GS2, while another phone scores 80fps and yet GS2 has lower score. You just have to bench GS2 on strong benchmark apps like Nenamark2 and GLBenchmark2.

Understanding the current generation SoC and benchmark:
SoC stands for System on a Chip. But most of us care only about the CPU and GPU on it.
Snapdragon (all 3 iterations) used the same Scorpion CPU core, at different clockspeed. The one on the Sensation has two cores, both can run up to 1.2Ghz, so if a benchmark is single threaded and very CPU heavy, the latest Snapdragon can only be 20% faster than the first generation 1Ghz Snapdragon.
Qualcomm uses a custom design for the Scorpion. Roughly speaking, the performance of the Scorpion lies somewhere between Cortex A8 and A9. In general, SoC with dual core Cortex A9's like Exynos, Tegra 2, OMAP4 will be faster in CPU heavy apps and benchmark. Yet, the Scorpion is exceptionally good at FPU heavy task, so... if FPU matter for that app/benchmark, Scorpion could pull over.
GPU wise, this depends on resolution. Higher resolution means more pixel to generate and lower benchmark score, OTHER THINGS EQUAL. The GPU on the dual-core Snapdragon is as powerful as those on Exynos and OMAP4, with one winning in some benchmark and another winning in another. Due to different resolutions on different handsets, it's hard to tell, but they are among the same class. The Tegra 2, however, has a weaker GPU than the bunch mentioned above. This may come at a surprise to everyone consider Nvidia is a graphic card company and the chip is often being promoted as "most powerful". The truth is, the Tegra 2 was supposed to be released in mid 2010 but the market wasn't ready for dual-core phones back then. So the Tegra 2 got delayed for a year, and the design of Tegra 2 was set early. But that's also why Nvidia is almost ready to launch Kal-El/Tegra 3 whatever the next thing is, because the design of Tegra 2 was done long time ago.
So if a benchmark is graphically intensive, and doesn't depending too much on CPU, Snapdragon will be faster than Tegra 2, while Exynos will be the fastest (especially since there is no qHD Exynos device out there yet). On FPU heavy CPU bench, like Linpack, Snapdragon perform exceptionally well due to its CPU design. But with benchmarks that test a wider variety of CPU function, Cortex A9 equipped SoC will beat Snapdragon. And while Tegra 2 has a weaker GPU, it may perform better in some games..... because of Nvidia's "the way it meant to be played" program. Basically it's Nvidia way to fund developers to optimize the code for Nvidia's chips, and market their games. It is no uncommon to see games that are funded by Nvidia's TWIMTBP program run faster on Nvidia's card than on AMD's card.
But what does all the above mean? IT DOESN'T F***ING MATTER AT ALL. All the current dual-core SoCs are fast enough for everything you want to do on your phone. They are equally (not) future proof, and when the future comes that your current phone is too slow, the other current gen phones will be slow too. And honestly, these ARM based SoCs are evolving so fast that none of these SoCs is really future proof. Just pick the phone that feels right or you. IGNORE those stupid benchmark numbers, and pick the phone that physically appeal to you, and pick the phone that is less buggy, or has the best monitor (for you). And if you really care about benchmark numbers, get the GSII. It has the fastest ARM-based CPU right now, one of the fastest mobile GPUs, and a relatively lower resolution screen so that it dominates all benchmarks. It also has enough plastic to be a true successor to the GS I as the most plasticky Android phone, if that matters.

Interesting new reviews/benchmarks N3 VS G2 VS Z1

Interesting results here. Everybody has been saying the G2 is quicker and better then Note 3 and I must say I am quite shocked with these findings so far
http://thedroidguy.com/2013/09/sams...-sony-xperia-z1-vs-lg-g2-benchmark-comparison

i dont care. n3 is the better phone.

oh i dont disagree i agree 100% that is why i have a note 3 coming and im not stopping at verizon today to see the overrated g2!

hah G2 is like a on screen buttoned Galaxy S4 LG is copying Samsung on many things these days -_-

Blackwolf10 said:
hah G2 is like a on screen buttoned Galaxy S4 LG is copying Samsung on many things these days -_-
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I know right! everything almost looks the same. Its like there are a dev and just made a rooted s4 with some new ui looks!

Here's a potential difference. There are two versions of S-800; MSM8974 and MSM8974AB. Here's AnandTech's take...
Xiaomi makes the first (to my knowledge) public disclosure of MSM8974AB, which is analogous to the changes we saw between APQ8064 and APQ8064AB. From 8974 to 8974AB, Adreno 330 GPU clocks climb from 450 MHz to 550 MHz, LPDDR3 memory interface maximum data rates go from 800 MHz to 933 MHz, and the ISP clock domain (I think Xiaomi might mean the Hexagon DSP here) goes from 320 MHz to 465 MHz. 8974 comes in both a bin with the 4 Krait 400 CPUs clocked at 2.2 GHz (really 2.15 GHz) and 2.3 GHz (2.26 GHz) with slightly different pricing, while 8974AB comes with a Krait 400 clock available only at 2.3 GHz. Process is still TSMC 28nm HPM, but I suspect that the AB variant might have the high k dielectric and/or transistor mix tuned slightly differently based on a few rumblings I've heard recently.​The S-600 in the SGS4 was "AB" so the the S-800 in the N3 might be also. We'll find out when more detailed reviews start to come out.
From AnandTech discussing the SGS4's S-600 chip...
That brings us to the Galaxy S 4. It's immediately apparent that something is different here because Samsung is shipping the Snapdragon 600 at a higher frequency than any other OEM. The Krait 300 cores in SGS4 can run at up to 1.9GHz vs. 1.7GHz for everyone else. Curiously enough, 1.9GHz is the max frequency that Qualcomm mentioned when it first announced Snapdragon 600.
Samsung is obviously a very large customer, so at first glance we assumed it could simply demand a better bin of Snapdragon 600 than its lower volume competitors. Looking a bit deeper however, we see that the Galaxy S 4 uses something different entirely.
Digging through the Galaxy S 4 kernel source we see references to an APQ8064AB part. As a recap, APQ8064 was the first quad-core Krait 200 SoC with no integrated modem, more commonly referred to as Snapdragon S4 Pro. APQ8064T was supposed to be its higher clocked/Krait 300 based successor that ended up with the marketing name Snapdragon 600. APQ8064AB however is, at this point, unique to the Galaxy S 4 but still carries the Snapdragon 600 marketing name.
If we had to guess, we might be looking at an actual respin of the APQ8064 silicon in APQ8064AB. Assuming Qualcomm isn't playing any funny games here, APQ8064AB may simply be a respin capable of hitting higher frequencies. We'll have to keep a close eye on this going forward, but it's clear to me that the Galaxy S 4 is shipping with something different than everyone else who has a Snapdragon 600 at this point.​

BarryH_GEG said:
Here's a potential difference. There are two versions of S-800; MSM8974 and MSM8974AB. Here's AnandTech's take...
Xiaomi makes the first (to my knowledge) public disclosure of MSM8974AB, which is analogous to the changes we saw between APQ8064 and APQ8064AB. From 8974 to 8974AB, Adreno 330 GPU clocks climb from 450 MHz to 550 MHz, LPDDR3 memory interface maximum data rates go from 800 MHz to 933 MHz, and the ISP clock domain (I think Xiaomi might mean the Hexagon DSP here) goes from 320 MHz to 465 MHz. 8974 comes in both a bin with the 4 Krait 400 CPUs clocked at 2.2 GHz (really 2.15 GHz) and 2.3 GHz (2.26 GHz) with slightly different pricing, while 8974AB comes with a Krait 400 clock available only at 2.3 GHz. Process is still TSMC 28nm HPM, but I suspect that the AB variant might have the high k dielectric and/or transistor mix tuned slightly differently based on a few rumblings I've heard recently.​The S-600 in the SGS4 was "AB" so the the S-800 in the N3 might be also. We'll find out when more detailed reviews start to come out.
From AnandTech discussing the SGS4's S-600 chip...
That brings us to the Galaxy S 4. It's immediately apparent that something is different here because Samsung is shipping the Snapdragon 600 at a higher frequency than any other OEM. The Krait 300 cores in SGS4 can run at up to 1.9GHz vs. 1.7GHz for everyone else. Curiously enough, 1.9GHz is the max frequency that Qualcomm mentioned when it first announced Snapdragon 600.
Samsung is obviously a very large customer, so at first glance we assumed it could simply demand a better bin of Snapdragon 600 than its lower volume competitors. Looking a bit deeper however, we see that the Galaxy S 4 uses something different entirely.
Digging through the Galaxy S 4 kernel source we see references to an APQ8064AB part. As a recap, APQ8064 was the first quad-core Krait 200 SoC with no integrated modem, more commonly referred to as Snapdragon S4 Pro. APQ8064T was supposed to be its higher clocked/Krait 300 based successor that ended up with the marketing name Snapdragon 600. APQ8064AB however is, at this point, unique to the Galaxy S 4 but still carries the Snapdragon 600 marketing name.
If we had to guess, we might be looking at an actual respin of the APQ8064 silicon in APQ8064AB. Assuming Qualcomm isn't playing any funny games here, APQ8064AB may simply be a respin capable of hitting higher frequencies. We'll have to keep a close eye on this going forward, but it's clear to me that the Galaxy S 4 is shipping with something different than everyone else who has a Snapdragon 600 at this point.​
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
so could be why we are seeing higher scores in the test note 3?

Why are people knocking the G2? It's the second fastest device on the market. It has an amazing screen area ratio and a very nice battery. It's camera is also one of the best. I would never consider it because I can never go back below 5.5 inches and I can't stand on screen buttons. But that phone should make a lot of people very happy.

Techweed said:
Why are people knocking the G2? It's the second fastest device on the market. It has an amazing screen area ratio and a very nice battery. It's camera is also one of the best. I would never consider it because I can never go back below 5.5 inches and I can't stand on screen buttons. But that phone should make a lot of people very happy.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
im not saying its not a nice phone but nothing that "wows" me. It looks worse then Touch Wiz not a huge fan of but its ok (sense is my fav), the phone doesnt have sdcard and removable battery also a no no (why i didnt buy htc one), Note 3 has better specs with an spen and loads of new features. G2 looks like a rooted S4 running a launcher and i wasnt impressed by S4. So with that being said this is just a tad faster S4 with same look almost. Now Note 3 you may say is same look as S4 while it is, it at least carries an sdcard and removable battery and the dev support should be behind sammy. Also i do remember LG making an Intuition, revolution, lucid? whatever happened to those? oh thats right they fell through the cracks. LG just cant compete with samsung, htc, or even motorola right now

oneandroidnut said:
Interesting results here. Everybody has been saying the G2 is quicker and better then Note 3 and I must say I am quite shocked with these findings so far
http://thedroidguy.com/2013/09/sams...-sony-xperia-z1-vs-lg-g2-benchmark-comparison
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Everybody? Who's saying that?
BTW, that article is useless. They are combining results from various places - PhoneArena/GSMArena etc.,
They took GN3 numbers from here: http://blog.gsmarena.com/the-first-benchmarks-scores-of-samsung-galaxy-note-3-are-in/
They also added some from PhoneArena: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NBwq0iAoVzQ
One major thing everyone forgets is that running benchmark from display models in launch events is plain wrong.
A] Most phones in such events (IFA, CES, MWC) are always charging. You should never benchmark when the phones is charging.
B] Have you ever seen any 'reviewer' in those shows to reboot the phone before running benchmarks? These display phones are abused by tech-journos. Tons of things would be running in the background. Yes, nobody bothers to clear the memory by rebooting it once. What's the point of such benchmark? Not to talk about thermal envelope after using these phones continuously.
C] G2 running release firmware, rest 2 phones running pre-release version.
(IMO) AnTuTu shouldn't be considered as a good benchmark. A benchmark tool must provide consistent repeatable result. If you run AnTuTu 5 times, I guarantee you that you will get variable result most times. No wonder AT doesn't like using AnTuTu.
Benchmarks never killed a phone :angel::angel:

CLARiiON said:
Everybody? Who's saying that?
BTW, that article is useless. They are combining results from various places - PhoneArena/GSMArena etc.,
They took GN3 numbers from here: http://blog.gsmarena.com/the-first-benchmarks-scores-of-samsung-galaxy-note-3-are-in/
They also added some from PhoneArena: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NBwq0iAoVzQ
One major thing everyone forgets is that running benchmark from display models in launch events is plain wrong.
A] Most phones in such events (IFA, CES, MWC) are always charging. You should never benchmark when the phones is charging.
B] Have you ever seen any 'reviewer' in those shows to reboot the phone before running benchmarks? These display phones are abused by tech-journos. Tons of things would be running in the background. Yes, nobody bothers to clear the memory by rebooting it once. What's the point of such benchmark? Not to talk about thermal envelope after using these phones continuously.
C] G2 running release firmware, rest 2 phones running pre-release version.
(IMO) AnTuTu shouldn't be considered as a good benchmark. A benchmark tool must provide consistent repeatable result. If you run AnTuTu 5 times, I guarantee you that you will get variable result most times. No wonder AT doesn't like using AnTuTu.
Benchmarks never killed a phone :angel::angel:
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I hate benchmarks at events and real life situations is where it's at. We just need to wait till some more note 3 make it into the wild
Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk 2

oneandroidnut said:
Everybody has been saying the G2 is quicker and better then Note 3
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Why would anyone say that? No one even has the Note 3, so we have to default to expectations. Why would anyone expect the the similar but faster clocked phone to be slower?

dscline said:
Why would anyone say that?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Show "anyone" this. All the tests were conducted by the same source; GSMArena.
Benchmark PI
AnTuTu
Linpack
Egypt (Offscreen)
T-Rex (Offscreen)
Sunspider

BarryH_GEG said:
Show "anyone" this. All the tests were conducted by the same source; GSMArena.
Benchmark PI
AnTuTu
Linpack
Egypt (Offscreen)
T-Rex (Offscreen)
Sunspider
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
no g2 on that list though

oneandroidnut said:
no g2 on that list though
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Enjoy -- http://www.gsmarena.com/lg_g2-review-982p5.php

oneandroidnut said:
no g2 on that list though
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Oops, I thought "anyone" was saying the N2 was faster than the N3. My bad.
Here's the G2 numbers, again all from a single source; GSMArena.
Benchmark PI
Linpack
AnTuTu
Egypt (Offscreen)
T-Rex (Offscreen)
Sunspider
In case anyone's bummed about the lower AnTuTu score here's a score taken from a production unit that was reviewed by a Russian site. GSMArena conducted their tests on demo units at the Berlin launch event. Based on these scores I'd bet anyone here the N3 is using a "AB" chip where the XZ Ultra and LG G2 aren't. So, at least for the time being, the N3's the fastest Android device on the planet.
But not to be a buzz kill, the SGS4 got fantastic benchmarks but had some lag in early s/w releases due to the ton-'O-crap Samsung had loaded on it. It improved over time and the N3 has more RAM so I'm hoping benchmarks translate in to "feel."
http://translate.googleusercontent....v.html&usg=ALkJrhha6VTm0y89eM70OxVC5rPRLSw6nw

BarryH_GEG said:
Oops, I thought "anyone" was saying the N2 was faster than the N3. My bad.
Here's the G2 numbers, again all from a single source; GSMArena.
Benchmark PI
Linpack
AnTuTu
Egypt (Offscreen)
T-Rex (Offscreen)
Sunspider
In case anyone's bummed about the lower AnTuTu score here's a score taken from a production unit that was reviewed by a Russian site. GSMArena conducted their tests on demo units at the Berlin launch event. Based on these scores I'd bet anyone here the N3 is using a "AB" chip where the XZ Ultra and LG G2 aren't. So, at least for the time being, the N3's the fastest Android device on the planet.
But not to be a buzz kill, the SGS4 got fantastic benchmarks but had some lag in early s/w releases due to the ton-'O-crap Samsung had loaded on it. It improved over time and the N3 has more RAM so I'm hoping benchmarks translate in to "feel."
http://translate.googleusercontent....v.html&usg=ALkJrhha6VTm0y89eM70OxVC5rPRLSw6nw
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
thanks man! and i cant wait to get my hands on one! and dont know who would keep a n2 over the n3 lol

All I know is that my S4 always benches higher than my HTC One. S4 using the "higher" binned S600.
In real world use, the HTC One felt twice as fast as the S4. Even rooted and running a custom debloated rom and kernel overclocked to 2.1GHz, the S4 still was laggy and much MUCH slower than a stock HTC One. The S4 would lag and stutter all over the place despite showing the superior numbers so I now take benchmarks with a grain of salt.
I'm really hoping Samsung gets it together and instead of just showing higher benchmark numbers, actually perform in real world use like the numbers indicate.
I'm using an LG G2 right now while waiting for my GNote3, so far I am IN LOVE with the G2. It's hands down the fastest device I've ever used, Nothing slows this thing down and I have yet to encounter a hint of lag or micro stuttering. Battery life matches or exceeds my Note 2 which I thought was incredible, I'm not too worried about the non-removable battery anymore. The screen is by far the best display I have seen, and the camera is amazingly good with OIS. In my opinion the S4 is not even in the same league as the G2, hardware or software wise. I really loved my Note 2 and have my fingers crossed the Note 3 doesn't have the incredibly frustrating laggy experience that plagued both my S4's. I would really love to keep the Note 3 as my main device because I actually use the S-pen a lot.

Dan37tz said:
I'm using an LG G2 right now while waiting for my GNote3, so far I am IN LOVE with the G2. It's hands down the fastest device I've ever used, Nothing slows this thing down and I have yet to encounter a hint of lag or micro stuttering. Battery life matches or exceeds my Note 2 which I thought was incredible, I'm not too worried about the non-removable battery anymore. The screen is by far the best display I have seen, and the camera is amazingly good with OIS. In my opinion the S4 is not even in the same league as the G2, hardware or software wise. I really loved my Note 2 and have my fingers crossed the Note 3 doesn't have the incredibly frustrating laggy experience that plagued both my S4's. I would really love to keep the Note 3 as my main device because I actually use the S-pen a lot.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The G2 could be considered a "next gen" phone because of S-800 and the additional features LG's provided. The One and SGS4 with S-600 are previous generation phones. Sadly for SGS_ owners, their device is released before the N_ is and Samsung learns from issues with the SGS_ what not to do in the N_. The SGS3 Exynos with 1GB of RAM vs 2GB in the N2 is a good example.
I share your fears though. The launch s/w on the SGS4 was pretty bad. But I'm hoping that 3GB of RAM, S-800 "AB," and "lessons learned" will make the N3 as big an improvement over the SGS4 as the N2 was over the SGS3. I had no issues with the stock unrooted performance of the N2.
As for "fastest" that's subjective. I don't personally get off on millisecond faster screen transitions as much as I do on 30% faster browser performance which Sunspider indicates the N3 achieves over the G2. Where Samsung phones are "fast" for me is in how, through their features, they allow me to get stuff done faster and in ways I can't with other manufacturer’s devices.
I also don't consider the G2 in anyway a competitor to the N3. One's clearly a "phone" and the other's clearly a "phablet" with S Pen/S Note making the difference even greater. And the G2's lack of expandable storage is a step back not forward. That and the non-removable battery take it off my shopping list even if I were considering a "phone."

BarryH_GEG said:
I share your fears though. The launch s/w on the SGS4 was pretty bad. But I'm hoping that 3GB of RAM, S-800 "AB," and "lessons learned" will make the N3 as big an improvement over the SGS4 as the N2 was over the SGS3. I had no issues with the stock unrooted performance of the N2."
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
For the "AB" thing, I think, then, Note 3 is supposed to have Adreno 330 clocked at 550 MHz. Have you find any info regarding that?
BarryH_GEG said:
I also don't consider the G2 in anyway a competitor to the N3. One's clearly a "phone" and the other's clearly a "phablet" with S Pen/S Note making the difference even greater. And the G2's lack of expandable storage is a step back not forward. That and the non-removable battery take it off my shopping list even if I were considering a "phone."
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Apart from your buying preference, if it were for the image stabilization how'd you see Note 3 over G2 in terms of "smart stabilization" vs OIS?

[Q] Need help regarding mi3

Hi guys,
My dad bought two Mi3 from China. One has snapdragon and the other one tegra.I can keep one. Which one do you think is better. I know 3G won't work on tegra version but I don't use 3G anyway. All I need to know is which one is better in performance and for gaming.
Thanks a ton.

I believe the processor options in the Mi3 are the Tegra 4 or the Snapdragon 800. Since network compatibility is not your concern, here is a performance benchmark YouTube video that will help you make your decision - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9uKT6jQzJTU.
I think I would go for the Tegra...

I thought tegra 4 GPU would be faster. Even after having seen the benchmark I am still confused. Which one would be the overall winner?

I didn't want to double post but I don't have much time. I have to choose soon so please reply. I will be really thankful.

Hmm, if you have both phones with you right now, why don't you install a couple of high end games that you will play and see which one works better for you? If there is no noticeable difference and you have run benchmark tests on both and find the results almost similar, then I would pick the one which has better battery life and is compatible with my network.
I believe the 5th core in the Tegra 4 is useful for taking the load of the other cores and in turn results in battery savings though I do not really know how much this actually affects battery...

Thanks for helping me. I ran antutu on them both. Snapdragon got 41000 and tegra got 36000.I am keeping the snapdragon version.

Great, enjoy the phone!

3D performance is so bad?

Hi,
I've seen Antutu score is very high because the CPU is a monster. But the score of 3D performance is low and tests seen laggy.
What is really the performance in 3D games?.
Please, tell me your experience.
Greetings!

WuZaR said:
Hi,
I've seen Antutu score is very high because the CPU is a monster. But the score of 3D performance is low and tests seen laggy.
What is really the performance in 3D games?.
Please, tell me your experience.
Greetings!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I want to know as well

Mate 8 using T880MP4 and GPU is just same performance with Samsung Note 5 T760MP6. Huawei not good at GPU for their chip but Mate 8 is enough for all current game. If you are a phone gamer, better wait for S7 with T880MP12 (Exynos) or Adreno 530 (SD820). I don't know why Huawei they don't use T880MP12.

The Mate 8 GPU T880MP4 is enough for the Phone, Display and Games. It's better for Accu!

haiau said:
Mate 8 using T880MP4 and GPU is just same performance with Samsung Note 5 T760MP6. Huawei not good at GPU for their chip but Mate 8 is enough for all current game. If you are a phone gamer, better wait for S7 with T880MP12 (Exynos) or Adreno 530 (SD820). I don't know why Huawei they don't use T880MP12.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
i can tell you why: throttling!
with mp12 gpus ull get great scores for benchmarks but once u stress the system for more than one benchmark run (say, when gaming! ), throttling kicks in and u lose a great chunk of that wonderful performance. the kirin 950 doesnt have that problem, it stays right at its max. performance no matter how long u stress it and yes, due to the fullHD screen and absense of throttling its more than enough for all current games. i dont game much tbh, but i havent seen any lagging yet either...
Sent from my Huawei Mate 8 NXT-AL10 using Tapatalk

jbmc83 said:
i can tell you why: throttling!
with mp12 gpus ull get grest scores for benchmarks but once u stress the system for more than one benchmark run (say, when gaming! ), throttling kicks in and u lose a grest chunk of that wonderful performance. the kirin 950 doesnt have that problem, it stays right at its max. performance no matter how long u stress it and yes, due to the fullHD screen and abscense of throttling its more than enough for all current games. i dont game much tbh, but i havent seen any lagging yet either...
Sent from my Huawei Mate 8 NXT-AL10 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
yea the cpu is extream fast
ihad the note 5
and mate 8 is way faster and smoother
and the phone wont even lag for one time
i have no problems with heavy games tun smooth exept real boxing 2 lag :fingers-crossed:

S7 8890 or 820

Hello,
Im currently using a Samsung Galaxy S6 32gb and i love this phone and for me its a very good phone, it has everything i need, i have 9 pages of apps in the app drawer all my movie, games, pics, docs and songs and the phone never let me down but im a performance kinda guy and while i love the performance of the s6 after watching the unpacked 2016 i have decided to get the s7 but after doing so looking i found that the 8890 is more of a CPU SoC while the 820 is more of a GPU SoC so i wanna know i want to have the full S7 experience complete with the gear vr and vulkan api so which one should i get i know that the 820 is a 2+2 CPU with the GPU is doing about 550+ gflops while the 8890 is 4+4 and the GPU is doing about 250+ gflops so which one should i get and why and what are the pros and cons of each one
Thanks a lot and sorry for the long post

The only thing that matters is if you care about AOSP ROMs or not. If you do, Snapdragon is your only choice.

As said before I think there will not be a big difference in regards to the performance. The SD820 tends to be a little bit faster in single core applications, while the Exynos will perform better for multi core applications. Will you notice it? I doubt so.
The GPU in the SD820 is indeed faster, but potentially oversized, too (produces more heat => throttles more). So while benchmarks could be better, after some minutes the GPUs are (more or less) on the same high. Some people will agree, some will not
I think the only point that really matters is if you would like to get custom roms, mainly AOSP roms, at a certain time. With the SD820 your chances are a lot higher. Apart from that...

kaspar737 said:
The only thing that matters is if you care about AOSP ROMs or not. If you do, Snapdragon is your only choice.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
cerbsium said:
As said before I think there will not be a big difference in regards to the performance. The SD820 tends to be a little bit faster in single core applications, while the Exynos will perform better for multi core applications. Will you notice it? I doubt so.
The GPU in the SD820 is indeed faster, but potentially oversized, too (produces more heat => throttles more). So while benchmarks could be better, after some minutes the GPUs are (more or less) on the same high. Some people will agree, some will not
I think the only point that really matters is if you would like to get custom roms, mainly AOSP roms, at a certain time. With the SD820 your chances are a lot higher. Apart from that...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Im not actually into costume roms at all, i actually like the Samsung rom with the touch wiz ui so i guess it will be the 8890 since there wont be any real world noticeable difference

exynos gives 38k em 3d antutu and snap 820 50k, for games snap 820 will be better

matheus_sc said:
exynos gives 38k em 3d antutu and snap 820 50k, for games snap 820 will be better
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You're confusing benchmark scores with game performance. Despite the difference you list (which I suspect, from Exynos' perspective, is the worst result amongst many), I'll be amazed if you find a single game with a discernible performance increase on the Snapdragon. It's all about the heat and power efficiency, there could well be a difference between the two in that respect.

Noob question
How do I tell which one I have?

thafz said:
How do I tell which one I have?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Are you in america? Then you have the snapdragon, elsewhere gets the exynos.

peachpuff said:
Are you in america? Then you have the snapdragon, elsewhere gets the exynos.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Okay thanks I also ran the benchmark last night and it shows there exynos. Actually thought I had the 820 since mine gets pretty warm

matheus_sc said:
exynos gives 38k em 3d antutu and snap 820 50k, for games snap 820 will be better
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Wouldn't be accurate to say the exynos has a faster CPU and generally performs better in day to day tasks, while the adreno has a faster GPU which would do better with high end 3D gaming?